Should the Packers consider Michael Vick?

Greg Bedard was right in predicting that there would be some noise about Ted Thompson’s recent non-comments on Michael Vick. Here’s what TT said. (si, pft, nfl.com others have already run with this story). For most Packer fans, this looks like very typical TT rhetoric – non-committal, saying mostly nothing. But it seems to me that if 24 other teams have already weighed in stating convincingly that Vick is not in their plans, if TT were not interested, it would have been far less of a headache for him to just do the same. Now, he’s let loose the hounds. While this may all mean absolutely nothing, I guess I was a little surprised that he chose to handle it this way.

This is an intriguing question and one I hadn’t considered much before now. Not sure what exactly I would do as GM. I suppose if I were forced to render an opinion at this moment, I would say we should definitely consider it (because I actually do agree with TT, we should consider lots of possibilities all the time), but in the end I would say no. The major reason I think we shouldn’t pursue Vick much further is that the smoke is just now clearing from a very high profile/media-hyped divorce with Favre. We don’t need any more fire/smoke right now and the fact is, wherever Vick goes he will carry with him some degree of flammability (to continue on way too far with this whole fire/smoke metaphor). I also don’t think Vick would be a huge contributor on this particular offense (though that may not be giving McCarthy enough credit – he could probably figure out some creative things to do with an athlete like Vick).

Now, if the Favre situation hadn’t just happened, I might be more inclined to consider Vick, but I’m still not sure I’d sign him. Some reasons for considering him seriously follow. First of all, the salary he’ll command likely won’t match his talent level – he just went through bankruptcy and he’s desperate for money/an opportunity. Second, he is one of the more gifted players out there. Third, we all know he can play at Lambeau. Fourth, though I’d have some misgivings about signing a convicted felon, and his crimes were vicious and profoundly stupid, I do believe he has served his time (unlike Donte Stallworth). Fifth, he would be a great player to have on the roster in case something happened to Aaron Rodgers. Sixth, even if he we couldn’t find a huge role for him on our offense, if he made some plays and proved to the world that he avoid getting involved in inane activities off the field, he could become good trade bait – especially for a team desperate for a QB.

Regardless of the real meaning behind TT’s comments, I put the question to you all: should the Packers consider signing Michael Vick?

19 Responses to “Should the Packers consider Michael Vick?”

Hayes-
I like your last comment (and the recent frequency of posts – well done) about the possibility of Vick being trade bait. It is the way I hope TT looks at situations like this.

I say bring him in, put him on special teams, run a few plays for him in the offense and see what happens. At his salary is couldn’t hurt…and the rest of the men should be professionals, I’d hope some extra media hype around training camp wouldn’t throw their focus enough for them to again go 6-10.

now, if other teams get in on bidding for his services, then get out of the way and let them have him.

Let’s get serious, you don’t bring in a guy that will demand his level of salary to play Special Teams and a few Offensive plays a game. He will demand Millions and ultimately get it. Anyone who takes him, better have a good plan in hand. He could easily be a team cancer.

TT believes that it does no good to advise the media about how he feels about any particular free agent or even players currently on the roster. He extends that rule to the entire organization and I don’t think it is in his makeup to allow an exception to a rule. He may end having to in this case but he won’t be happy about it! It is funny watching the national media parse his statement. They either want to make a story out of nothing or they haven’t been around TT all that much the last few years!

I think you can make a case that Vick could not only be a good backup QB but I’m sure MM could also figure out a way to use him 5 plays a game in a way that would give defenses fits. Not only could Vick create some mismatches on game day but I would think it would cause game prep for defenses to be much more difficult. Not only does a defense have to game plan against a pretty good offense but now they have to worry about all the ways MM could use Vick in different ways. So, I think you do look into Vick. Is he willing to play that roll? Can you pay him based on the value of that role? Has this experience put his head on straight? Can he run like he did? How do some of the vets on the team feel about bringing him in? Do your homework and see where it leads and most likely it leads no where but maybe if all that checks out and you think you can get a truly humble reformed person with extraordinary skills you make that happen regardless of the circus it causes.

Quite the slippery slope. You sign him and the circus starts all over. All the National Media, PETA, etc. descend on training camp and potentially take the focus away from the preparation they need to do for the season. Could be a distraction for a team, that I think just needs some quiet time to get their work in.

On the other hand, is Vick in a “beggars can’t be choosers” scenario and would sign for a clearance rack base salary with a bunch of performance incentives? In that scenario, a roll of the dice would be warranted I think. Plus, as mentioned before, you can bring him in for camp and use him for trade bait.

Unrelated, is our punting going to be just as atrocious as last year? All that I have read thus far is making me nervous about having to pick someone up halfway through the season again.

As stated by Trav, Michael Vick will bring a media circus with him. This circus will follow him wherever he goes. We saw last year how this team handles a media circus. The Favre circus was enough! We don’t need any more distractions, especially since the team is instituting a new defensive scheme. Let Vick be someone else’s headache.

Obviously you wouldn’t sign him for 5 plays a game. He would also need value to the Packers as a backup QB. Would he be a better back-up option then Brohm or Flynn? I guess that depends how good you think Brohm or Flynn can eventually perform in this league and maybe that is what TT meant by improving the roster. The 5 extra plays a game are a bonus for a back-up QB and Vick wouldn’t eat up a roster spot if he is truly a better option as the 2nd or 3rd string QB.

This is Rodgers 2nd year. I don’t think he needs the spectre of Michael Vick haunting him right now. If I’m GM or coach I don’t want anything out there to shake his confidence or cause room to worry. I KNOW TT’s & Farve’s egos would never allow this to happen but if Aaron goes down the guy to call is in Hattiesburg. Now wouldn’t that just be a storybook end to a career. Just MHO.

Vick should not be the starter, unless he can somehow regain his skills and play like he did in Atlanta and BETTER. Vick is suited for a backup right now, as well as for the wildcat scenario. You have that and Vick can get playing time, make money and work to get better. If he gets good enough and wants to play etc, we could trade him, or consider using him fully. Either way its a win win. Vick could even line up as a receiver at times too. I mean there are countless ways to use him, and Rogers should not feel threatned that his job would be at stake. If anything Rogers should feel confident of his ability that it won’t throw him off his game, but actually make it better so he can slam the door shut in terms of losing the starting role.

You also need to consider he can be used in the wildcat. Put that into perspective and things get interesting. I mean, Rogers showed to be an impressive QB, nonetheless, needs some work finishing games. But throwing for 4000 yards and 28 TDS in his first season as a starter is a positive sign. So he’s likely going to improve, and our receiving core is only going to improve, they are young fresh guys, with alot of talent. So right there the offense looks good.

Jermichael Finley apparently is looking really well so far, which is another huge gain. Vick likes TE’s, I mean look at him and Alge Crumpler in Atlanta. And Grant is healthy so thats positive.

So we Got Rogers and the WRS looking good, improved TE situation, and improved running back situation, especially with Deshaun Wynn looking really good so far.

Now have Vick in a wildcat.. He can throw but I would not say he can throw very well. He has a good arm but it’s not near the top QBs out there especially when you look at his accuracy. But in wildcat, and with the ability to throw and assuming he can still run like he used to.. this could be a dangerously effective addition.

It will cause a media circus but if Vick is smart he will go out and play and get better. And thats all he has to say to the media. He just needs to go and focus on playing. The other players hopefully will accept his presence and hopefully they just feel that we just want him out here playing and doing everything he can to play at a high level. And that will keep the media circus at a low. Instead of listening to the media all day, just go out and perform and get better. Vick should know this and he needs to and hopefully the other players can understand this and not let the media beat them up.

Has anyone asked Rodgers what he thinks? What an insult to him. Don’t they have enough confidence in his ability to carry the team? Forget about the wildcat talk, if AR falters in any way, shape or form…Vick will be the signalcaller in GB.

Poor Aaron! He stands patiently on the sidelines for years, finally gets the position, has a great season, and now has to hear his teammates say, according to Silverstein’s article, that they would welcome Vick into Lambeau.

Packer fans have shown that it’s the uniform that matters, not the player, they wouldn’t have a problem with his former cruelty to animals. I think Vick would fit Lambeau like a glove. And with the Vick/Rodgers tandem at QB..it’s a Super Bowl for Green Bay!

Campbell – I am guessing that Rodgers is fairly comfortable with his status given the big fat contract they gave him and the fact they chased away the franchise QB for him. But yeah – part of the process for TT would be to talk to Rodgers and other vets on the team and see how the locker room would react to it. Maybe you are just being sarcastic but I am guessing Rodgers and the locker room is a big part of the equation for TT.

Rodgers might say all the PC things, but do you honestly think he’d be happy with the prospect of Vick on the team?. AR is now the established, talented and respected GB quarterback, a leader, but even his biggest boosters must admit to a blandness about his game.

Vick is/was one of the most exciting players in the NFL, a winning post-season QB. Your eyes followed him on the field. Rodgers
doesn’t have that gift. Of course if he wins a few titles, who cares? Silverstein’s article was interesting for the reaction of other Packer players who would welcome Vick to Lambeau. They may voice their loyalty to Rodgers, but a lot can happen in a tough NFL season and as I wrote previously, Packer fans care about the uniform, not who wears the green and gold and if MV was in the backfield in any capacity, they’d cheer, and can you imagine the havoc his presence would create for opposing defenses. Another interesting point in the piece was the team discussing if Rodgers did go down, they’d need some excitement for the fans. It’s as if they’re projecting an AR injury.

I found the column unsettling. I’m not Rodgers fan, but I wish him success and don’t think it’s fair to saddle him with this latest “distraction” He will handle it with his usual grace. But as we found out last year..this is a business and GB will look at this from a business standpoint.